Diver Training, Has It Really Been Watered Down???

[TMHeimer]

Mastery is specifically defined in the PADI standards. It uses the concept of mastery defined originally by Benjamin Bloom in 1968 in the educational process called "mastery learning." Mastery Learning is the instructional concept used by almost all dive agencies today. I am sorry you never learned about it, either while you were a scuba instructor or while you were a professional teacher.

Well, my bad I guess. Either way, I've never witnessed a student having to do any of the skills more than one time successfully--even if it was in no way smooth and easy looking (not talking about "demo" quality as in the DM course).
As a Band teacher, and during my 6 years of college I can't recall any discussions of "mastery".
I also never heard the word even mentioned by any of the 16 or so instructors or 10 DMs at our shop. Perhaps during taking the DM course, but that was for us Candidates doing the skills to demonstration level. I would call that mastery, but doubt there are many OW courses where anything close to that is required.
I'm aware of course that an OW course where each skill had to be done 5 or 10 times well would not fit the economics of most shops today. But in an ideal world I figure yes, the OW course has probably been watered down from what I hear about courses 30-40 years ago.

John-- Do me a favor and briefly paraphrase what PADI's definition of mastery of OW skills is?
I've been away from DMing 3 years now, but as I said, I've never been aware of it.
Back to Band-- I guess you'd have to define what mastery of an instrument is for someone who has played 2 years vs. someone in High School Band. By my own definition, I have never taught a student who had mastered an instrument (though of course I have had many outstanding students, one who I'd go as far as to say was a musical genious (in 9th grade he wrote a piece fully scored for our HS Band, and received comments that it was worthy to be used as a festival competition piece).
Personally, after a Masters in clarinet, player since 1963 and pro since 1973, there are still solos I have to practice to perform. And others I have "mastered" from memory. The "master" discussion was a very long thread back then.

 

[KenGordon]

When BSAC still had a forum I explicitly asked this question. Someone was good enough to review 10 years or so of incident reports covering 173 (if I remember correctly) OOA situations.

I found that review.

From 2006 to 2015 inclusive there were 173 OOG incidents.

21 were fatal
159 involved recreational diving
14 involved technical diving (I used a broad definition for this)
34 involved divers under instruction
96 involved single cylinder divers
45 involved single cylinder + Pony
19 involved twinsets
39 involved Alternative Take of which 9 (23%) failed
47 involved Alternative Donate of which 15 (32%) failed
2 involved Primary Take. Non failed
7 involved Primary Donate of which 2 failed (29%)
81 involved no successful action to provide emergency gas
(This category included panic ascents to the surface)

 

[boulderjohn]

Am I understanding this correctly? Does this mean that in 173 oog incidents, there were 2 cases in which the oog diver reached for and took someone’s primary regulator?

 

[shurite7]

John-- Do me a favor and briefly paraphrase what PADI's definition of mastery of OW skills is?
I've been away from DMing 3 years now, but as I said, I've never been aware of it.

PADI defines mastery as: "meeting meeting Knowledge Assessment requirements listed under Administrative Procedures. During confined and open water dives, mastery is defined as performing the skill so it meets the stated performance requirements in a reasonably comfortable, fluid, repeatable manner as would be expected of a diver at that certification level." p. 24 and 25 PADI Instructor Manual, 2017.

As a DM you should have heard of it. If you haven't it means you have not read the standards.

The concept of mastery has been around since the late 60s. Here is another link for an explanation: http://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/waoe/motamediv.htm

NAUI states "In the educational concept of conditioning, i.e., the overlearning of skills. NAUI Instructors should
structure every course to ensure adequate training and practice time." p. 9 NAUI S&P, 2017.

Here is something I've noticed - instructors have taken the PADI slates confined water 1 through 5 and interpreted it as each session is conducted once and then move on, rather than taking the time to master the skills. Years ago as a DM candidate (PADI and NAUI) I was told that PADI does not allow an instructor to go above standards. This is entirely not correct. I've spoken to PADI about this and one can teach above standards so long as it has purpose and benefit.

Again, what has diminished is the amount of time students spend on developing their skills, not standards. This is the fault of consumer (who wants it now without spending time), the instructor (who is willing to shorten training time), and the resorts/operators/shops (who are not able or refuse, for whatever reason, to require more time be spent on developing mastery).

 

[shurite7]

Naui, and more predominately PADI, I think have done the best they can to needle down the courses to the bare bones in order to make diving as commercially accessible as possible. More divers = more shoppers = more $$$. As far as I am concerned, they have managed to needle the courses down to the bare minimum and protect themselves from liability. I believe the motivation for that is $$$. This is my biggest criticism of the organizations.

What are you basing this on? Support your claim with evidence. Be specific. Give examples. I hear this claim all the time, but when asked what is meant the person can't elaborate. He/she is simply repeating what someone else told them or what they read on the internet.

 

[boulderjohn]

When I was certified a couple decades ago, my course took 3 days. Years later when I became a pro, I realized that they accomplished that by skipping a bunch of standards.

My niece was certified by a NAUI instructor about 15 years ago after a 2 hour pool session and a single OW dive to 10 feet.

In the history of NAUI cited earlier, Al Tillman said they knew from the start that many people were certified without completing classes, in some cases without starting them.

Yes, some instructors shorten classes, but that has been true forever.

 

[JamesBon92007]

When I was certified a couple decades ago, my course took 3 days. Years later when I became a pro, I realized that they accomplished that by skipping a bunch of standards.

My niece was certified by a NAUI instructor about 15 years ago after a 2 hour pool session and a single OW dive to 10 feet.

.

I'm happy to say that when my girlfriend was certified last year by a PADI instructor he made sure that she went all the way down to 60 feet. I'm certain that he tested her on all of the requirements. Altogether I think her course took three days but she started it in Cozumel and finished it in Puerto Vallarta and there was some computer stuff involved too. There are a couple of things that I noticed were missing such as equalizing her mask and buddy breathing (sharing one regulator) but all-in-all her instructor seemed to cover all the basics and made sure she was able to perform the basic skills. Since nobody seems to teach buddy breathing any more then it wasn't actually skipped. The mask equalization probably only became noticeable because she had an ear problem and a slight bloody nose, otherwise I don't see how anyone could dive very deep without equalizing their mask sooner or later, even if they don't realize they are doing it. Also missing was the surf entries and exits and harassment training. Is she ready to go beach diving in Southern California? Not in my opinion, but neither were the people who paid extra back in the 60s and only dived from a boat during their course. Personally I think the harassment training was a positive thing--we learned how to deal with sudden emergencies and not to panic. Is she ready to dive Cozumel with a DM? Sure, and she has many times.

 

[boulderjohn]

There are a couple of things that I noticed were missing such as equalizing her mask and buddy breathing (sharing one regulator) but all-in-all her instructor seemed to cover all the basics and made sure she was able to perform the basic skills. Since nobody seems to teach buddy breathing any more then it wasn't actually skipped.

Buddy breathing is not even an option for most agencies today. Using an alternate regulator is not only a superior process, buddy breathing requires so much skill that most people believe it is not a good option. As for me, on a recreational dive, I would rather do a CESA than buddy breathe.

You cannot possibly include all possible dive situations in all courses. If you are going to require surf entries, you are going to eliminate most of the world as a place where you can get certified. I am working on 1,500 dives around the world, and I have done maybe 5-6 surf entries--total. If you are going to demand that certification include something only done by a tiny percentage of the population, then maybe ice diving should be a basic requirement as well.

 

[Bob DBF]

From your link for mastery learning.

"Mastery learning maintains that students must achieve a level of mastery (e.g., 90% on a knowledge test) in prerequisite knowledge before moving forward to learn subsequent information. "

Using that 90% on skills could be 90 of 100 trys or just 1 of 1 try, both have met the requirement. Is there a stated number of attempts made, or counted as "the test" when testing skills?


Bob

 

[boulderjohn]

From your link for mastery learning.

"Mastery learning maintains that students must achieve a level of mastery (e.g., 90% on a knowledge test) in prerequisite knowledge before moving forward to learn subsequent information. "

Using that 90% on skills could be 90 of 100 trys or just 1 of 1 try, both have met the requirement. Is there a stated number of attempts made, or counted as "the test" when testing skills?

I used to do extended workshops on this topic. I will try to give a highly condensed version here, bearing in mind that doing so violates what I call the "reduction funnel," whereby large ideas are rendered meaningless through repeated condensations.

In traditional education, time is the constant, and learning is the variable. We teach students for a certain amount of time and then measure the result. If the result reaches a pretty low standard, the student is said to have passed. The student is given a passing grade, and the lesson is over. If the result does not reach that pretty low standard, the student is said to have failed. The student is given a failing grade, and the lesson is over. The student who has failed moves on to try to learn more challenging concepts without having mastered the prerequisite skills those more challenging concepts demand.

In mastery (sometimes called standards-based) education, learning is the constant, and time is the variable. We teach students, measuring constantly, until they have reached a high standard, regardless of the amount of time it takes to complete the process. The student does not move on to the more challenging concepts until the prerequisite skills have been mastered.

In OW scuba instruction, the student must first master clearing a partially flooded mask. Once that is done, the student must clear a fully flooded mask. Having shown control of that process, the student must remove and replace a mask. Once mastery has been shown there, the student must do a full mask swim with a mask replacement. You do not fail the student at each step along the way and then expect him or her to get it right in the final demonstration.